Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
orangEMT246

Newark,NJ Can Be Sued Over Murder-Mishandled By 911 Operators

8 posts in this topic

The city of Newark NJ can be sued for a murder that occured 7 years ago, due to the mishandling of the 911 call by a operator and police dispatcher. It sounds like a few agencies are in the wrong here. A woman is screaming for help as she is being forced into a car, a off-duty Essex county officer calls 911, and the operator says "what are (police) going to do, by the time they come out, this car will be gone." Here is the link http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2007/11/c...sued_for_d.html If anyone can post the article for me it would be greatly appreciated. Any thoughts from the dispatchers on here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Court: Newark can be sued for dispatcher's missteps in murder

by Kate Coscarelli/The Star-Ledger

Thursday November 15, 2007, 11:00 AM

Because of the missteps of a 911 operator and police dispatcher, Newark can be sued in the daylight abduction of a Seton Hall University student who was killed by her ex-boyfriend seven years ago, a state appeals court ruled today.

A three-judge panel of the state Appellate Division found the operator could be held liable in the same way police officers are negligent can be held accountable.

"Once the city made a decision to hire 911 operators and provide them with specific procedural regulations governing the manner in which they must respond to calls, then the negligent performance of those 911 operators is not entitled to immunity," wrote Judge Linda Baxter in a 30-page decision.

The decision overturns a 2005 ruling by a state Superior Court Judge in Essex County that the city was immune.

Attorneys for Massachi's family and the city did not immediately return calls seeking comment.

The case stems from the 2000 abduction of Sohayla Massachi, 23, in front of Seton Hall campus in South Orange on May 10. Her ex-boyfriend, Christopher Honrath, 24, forced her into his car as she pleaded for help. He drove her to his apartment in Westfield where he shot her and then killed himself. She died of her injuries two days later.

Several people witnessed the abduction and initially alerted campus security who said they couldn't do anything because the crime didn't happen on campus. An off-duty Essex County Sheriff's officer also witnessed the event and called 911 to report Massachi was "struggling, screaming and beating on the windows," the court wrote.

The 911 operator, Debony Venable, told the officer "what are (police) going to do, by the time they come out this car will be gone."

She also incorrectly entered the type of car into the 911 system and did not report the last known location of the vehicle or if it was in motion, the judges found. She had questions about how to handle the call, but instead of talking to a supervisor, she merely consulted a co-worker, the judges wrote.

A dispatcher, George Mike, sent a car to the scene, but did not issue a general police alert, even though that was required procedure, the court found. By the time police got there the car was long gone.

After the incident, Newark found Venable had neglected her official duties.

The judges ordered the case back to trial court for further proceedings.

Read the decision.

link: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2007/11/c...sued_for_d.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If in fact this is true, I fully agree that the family should be able to sue. It does not seem like it would be asking too much to gather the information and broadcast it over the air when there is a police officer telling you that a crime is in progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What an idiot! Give out the description, keep the caller on the line, see if he can tail it loosely as not to alarm the perp! This is basic common sense, obvioulsy the dispatcher "knew someone" or was a good test taker!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blatant negligence, unreal!! ALL DISPATCHERS, YOU ARE BEING RECORDED AND WHAT YOU SAY CAN BE USED AGAINST YOU!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lengths to which people will go to avoid doing their job never ceases to amaze me. Whether this was a lack of training or a lack of supervision it sure sounds like negligence to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
".....what are (police) going to do, by the time they come out, this car will be gone.".....

Priceless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The lengths to which people will go to avoid doing their job never ceases to amaze me. Whether this was a lack of training or a lack of supervision it sure sounds like negligence to me.

Right! I deal with it all the time! It is so ridiculous! Put the job in and send someone...you get no where arguing with people...except in a deep hole! We, as dispatchers need to wake up and realize we can be held legally responsible for our actions or our inactions. Recently I requested that a procedure be developed to deal with cellular 911 calls...my supervisors then dropped it in my lap and asked me to come up with said...I did it, on OT of course and submitted it weeks ago...they still have not acted upon it! So at least we are covered by the fact that it has been requested...some of my co-workers were annoyed at it...but they don't know how much it protects them at this point because management has been notified!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.